From: Nathan Lynch <ntl@pobox.com>
To: Breno Leitao <leitao@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Anton Blanchard <anton@samba.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC/PATCH 0/3] sched: allow arch override of cpu power
Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2008 09:23:09 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20080627142309.GR9594@localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4863F2CC.1030907@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Breno Leitao wrote:
> Nathan Lynch wrote:
>> There is an "interesting" quality of POWER6 cores, which each have 2
>> hardware threads: assuming one thread on the core is idle, the primary
>> thread is a little "faster" than the secondary thread. To illustrate:
>>
> I found this feature interesting and decided to do some tests.
> After some tests I found that the example you post really runs fast in
> the first CPU, but a more "elaborated" application runs slower on the
> first CPU.
> Here is a small example:
>
> # taskset 0x1 time -f "%e, %U, %S" ./a.out ; taskset 0x2 time -f "%e,
> %U, %S" ./a.out
> 10.77, 10.72, 0.01
> 10.53, 10.48, 0.01
>
> # taskset 0x2 time -f "%e, %U, %S" ./a.out ; taskset 0x1 time -f "%e,
> %U, %S" ./a.out
> 10.55, 10.50, 0.01
> 10.77, 10.72, 0.01
I've been able to duplicate your results, thanks for the testcase.
Guess I'll need to understand what's going on before continuing with
this...
prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-06-27 14:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-06-19 0:29 [RFC/PATCH 0/3] sched: allow arch override of cpu power Nathan Lynch
2008-06-19 0:29 ` [RFC/PATCH 1/3] sched: support arch override of sched_group " Nathan Lynch
2008-06-19 0:29 ` [RFC/PATCH 2/3] add cpu_power to machdep_calls, override SD_SIBLING_INIT Nathan Lynch
2008-06-19 0:29 ` [RFC/PATCH 3/3] adjust cpu power for secondary threads on POWER6 Nathan Lynch
2008-06-19 2:58 ` Olof Johansson
2008-06-19 3:03 ` Olof Johansson
2008-06-19 9:50 ` [RFC/PATCH 0/3] sched: allow arch override of cpu power Ingo Molnar
2008-06-19 17:09 ` Nathan Lynch
2008-06-26 19:49 ` Breno Leitao
2008-06-27 14:23 ` Nathan Lynch [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20080627142309.GR9594@localdomain \
--to=ntl@pobox.com \
--cc=anton@samba.org \
--cc=leitao@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=paulus@samba.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).